Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 12:36:03 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: lehey.pad@sni.de, smpatel@umiacs.UMD.EDU, current@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: request for a new "feature" as regards DDB Message-ID: <199604231936.MAA20121@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199604230928.TAA12645@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Apr 23, 96 07:28:35 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >why ddb shouldn't understand enough about generic VGA to be able to > >put it back in 25x80 mode. Somewhere I have a little program which I > >used to do this under BSD/386 0.3, where the X server wasn't always > >successful. It's only a few lines. I'm sure somebody's going to come > >up with "yes, but that's not completely generic", but I don't think > >this is an adequate argument. Make it a config option for ddb, and > > "yes, but that's not completely generic" :-). I can't tell if Bruce is making fun of me or not. 8-). But that's not completely generic. > >it'll handle 98% of all hardware. If somebody with the other 2% > >wants, they can do it for that hardware as well. > > It'll only handle 98% of all hardware that is running in a VGA compatible > mode. I guess most X modes aren't VGA compatible. They aren't. Anything which programs the clocks not through a kernel model is not state-recoverable by kernel code (like DDB). The kernel debugger was almost the primary reason for suggesting a kernel DDX. Now that Plan 9 has abstracted the card specific drivers into the kernel (/dev/vga, /dev/bitblt, etc.) and the Linux community has a "GGI" project in the works, FreeBSD has less and less of an excuse. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604231936.MAA20121>